Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Technology
In the last couple of months, Apple launched iOS 17.
I used to love these software updates …
I’d look up tips and tricks on the internet and spend the day messing with all the features.
But now – after all these years of updates – things are getting a bit thin on the ground and you can almost hear the scraping of the barrel in terms of what is being added or updated.
One of those is a feature that can tell if you’re holding the phone too close to your eyes.
If you are … you get this:

All good eh?
Well, not so much.
Because when you are a short-sighted fool with only one working eye, you have to put your phone pretty close to your face all the time … which means your iPhone stops what you’re looking at to tell you it’s too close to your face ALL THE TIME.
I know Apple increasingly wants to be seen as a credible health-tech company.
I get it must be increasingly difficult to create new features that impress.
I appreciate this alert has some value – and you can [thankfully] turn it off.
But it all feels a bit try-hard, a desperate attempt to have new news.
I get it, but it feels counter to what they once said about their innovation approach:
“New is easy, right is hard”.
OK, so they said it as a brilliant response to claims they were falling behind in innovation compared to brands like Samsung … but over the years, I’ve really felt their approach to innovation was more about integration than one-off gimmicks.
And it was good.
Until now … unless, of course, they’ve done a collab with Spec Savers and I get an email notifying me I need an eye-test and they’ve already booked my appointment.
Or they just automatically increase the font size … which could also be said for this blog.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Comment, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Egovertising, Fake Attitude, Grifting, Innovation, Management, Technology
Warning. This post is topical.
In fact, it may be the most topical post I’ve ever written on here for 20 years.
Please read, while sitting down in case shock overwhelms you.
This is the end of this public service announcement.
So over the years, at Wieden and R/GA, I had a few dealings with WeWork.
And while I admit at the very beginning I thought it was a genius idea – specifically the way they were creating a business that dramatically profited from sub-letting space that was designed to appeal to a particular audience who felt they deserved to work in a particular kind of environment – after I met them, I started thinking something didn’t quite add up.
Please don’t think I am trying to suggest I had any idea of the level of craziness that was going on because I didn’t … I just couldn’t understand why they kept talking about themselves as a tech company and experts in work environments and culture when they were just a new generation of business space renting organisation.
But billions were poured into them and they were the darling of so many – especially those investor/companies who love to talk about ‘disrupting categories’, despite the fact most are about as conservative as you can get.
But over time – as numerous books, documentaries and news reports have documented – WeWork was proven to be a case of Emperor’s New Clothes.
And founder ego and delusion.
Specifically one founder … because on the few occasions I met him, Miguel seemed decent and grounded, whereas Adam most certainly didn’t.

Zoom forward to today and the company has filed for bankruptcy protection.
All that money and they still fucked it.
Worse, the delusional, ego-maniac that is Adam Neumann – who took a good idea and killed it with his God complex – got to walk away with a level of wealth that will last a thousand lifetimes.
Multiple billions.
BILLIONS!
But this isn’t a post about unfairness or WeWork’s craziness – I’ve written loads about that – this is about the challenge to encourage new thinking while not being blinded by it.
We live in divisive times.
Everything seemingly turns into a war.
Those who believe and those who don’t … and that extends to new ideas.
The amount of time I’ve seen people immediately dismiss new concepts or thinking simply because they are not as perfect as something established that has had years to work through issues and train people to conform.
But by the same token, I’ve also seem people blindly back a new concept or thinking because they seemingly want to associate themselves with the topical.
We saw this last one on a grand scale with so many people on Linkedin suddenly announcing themselves as AI experts, in a desperate bid to exploit the market interest and the market lack of knowledge.
Which gets to the heart of this post which is the importance of independent, critical thinking.
Where you are supportive of new ideas and thinking but know it is OK to ask questions about actions and decisions. Not to tear things down, but to better understand what is being done.
Starting from a position of ‘they could be right’ rather than ‘they’re obviously wrong’.
Focusing on the business not the hype … which, as Lee Hill once told me … is often as simply as acknowledging ‘profit is sanity, turnover is vanity’.
Critical, independent thinking isn’t celebrated enough.
Oh we may think it is, but what often we’re seeing is blinkered ego thinking.
Not enough understanding.
Not enough knowledge.
Not enough homework.
Not enough questions.
Not enough patience.
WeWork has cost millions of people billions of dollars … and yet you can’t help but think it didn’t have to be that way.
Their original business idea was a good one.
But the promise of trillions seduced people to lose their ability to think.
Critically and independently.
I wrote about this years ago with a lesson from the master conman, Bernie Madoff:
“I succeeded because when you offer people a deal that’s too good to be true, they never want to look too hard into the facts. They say it’s because of trust. I say it’s because of greed.”
We need to encourage positive pessimism.
The ability to champion new ideas without blindly being seduced by them.
To want to help people succeed without falling into being an accomplice for any delusion or slight of hand.
It’s not hard … but the more we promote blinkered ‘framework and eco-system’ thinking, the more we lose the value of independent thinking and then everyone loses in every way possible.
Especially those who have exciting new ideas that just need our encouragement and time.
Filed under: Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Complicity, Context, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Teamwork, Technology

I always laughed when people blamed Microsoft Powerpoint for bad presentations.
The idea that this program was purely responsible for you choosing to write 15,000 pointless words on a page in small font.
Sure, it had limitations … sure, it could encourage a certain ‘look’ for what you wanted to present … but fundamentally, that was on you, not it.
Don’t get me wrong, for a tech company … I’m shocked at how bad their user experience is.
If you think their classic platforms are bad, you should see the utter shit show that is a parents account on X-Box.
Or Microsoft Teams.
Oh my god, how can a company that can so carefully and considerately design an X-Box controller for those with disability make such a shit show of everything else.
I literally don’t understand it. Honestly.
Teams is the most user un-intutitive experience I’ve ever had.
Things don’t make sense. Things are unnecessarily complex. Things are hidden.
And yet, instead of fixing this – it seems their focus is to land-grab the video collaboration market, regardless if people like working with it or not.
You can’t go a week without being told Teams now offers a new feature.
Some – as you can see from the photo above – are relatively big things.
Most, aren’t.
A range of tools/functions that seem to only cater to the most niche or nerdy of Teams users.
It all feels like Samsung phones.
When you start one up, you see a bunch of apps that seem to serve no purpose whatsoever other than to be able to say you can do something with it that no one will ever want to do something with.
Ego rather than value.
And here lies the problem with Microsoft …
They claim all they do is about aiding collaboration, but in practice, it appears they have no understanding of how teams – or humans for that matter – actually work together.
For all the efficiency they claim they want us to be able to operate at, they are – arguably – making us more inefficient, either by making things more difficult than it should – or needs – to be, or trying to push us to answers without any capacity for giving the situation some thought to make things better.
And maybe that’s the next gen of their business model.
A desire to make efficiency about quantity than quality … a way to help their corporate clients keep their staff costs lower by not allowing any one individual to rise while also giving them more opportunities to sell tools, like their new AI model which will be incorporated in many of their products.
Yeah … I know, I sound like a conspiracy nutcase and I don’t really believe this is the reason, which means it’s something far worse.
They make for what they wish we did rather than who we actually are.
Or said another way, innovators of control, rather than efficiency.





Filed under: China, Comment, Government, Technology, Tourism
… yet despite that, it may also be one of the most thought-provoking.
And potentially scary.
Even scarier than the start of yet another week, and not because it features my voice.
[Though that is also very scary]
So errrrm, enjoy.